> But we are testing pretty much C2 on browser.
>
That is expressly what we are testing, yes. Read http://www.scirra.com/blog/ - the team are working on getting C2 functionality working in-browser first - so... yeah, it's going to be C2 on a browser <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_confused.gif" alt=":?" title="Confused"> Isn't that really enough, for now?
On launch, C2 didn't include an image editor, a physics engine, tilemapping, social media integration, complex collision polygons, multiplayer, not even half the exporters or publishing plugins, web-font support, lighting, positioned audio, LOS, debugger or profiler... the list goes on. I know a lot of these things are missing from C3 at present - but this team is no slouch! Have a little faith.
That's a great point and I want to add something I feel a lot of people don't realize.
While Ashley and team has not mentioned money being a big part of their decisions recently (as they shouldn't) all those features were possible, and C2 is the great engine we have now, because people paid for it, supported it and they were able to constantly add onto it.
Cash flow must be tight selling one off licenses to an ever-shrinking target audience.
Although it would have been great to have gotten more than quality of life and performance updates for the launch of C3, I will support it, because that money will be used to fund Construct's Team to continue building on it.